Bill Clinton calls for revote, says FL would not be treated this way if vote went "the other way."

madfloridian

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed May-14-08 09:39 PM
Original message

Bill Clinton calls for revote, says FL would not be treated this way if vote went "the other way."

I don't think they realize how odd this sounds to keep saying this stuff about a revote. Today Bill Clinton in Montana called again for a revote. He suggests that Obama refused a revote.

He went so far today as to say that he thought his wife was "being punished", and then he asks a strange question. Very strange. I have posted this in comments here today and got no response, but it is very odd.

He says:

And I just ask you all this, do you really believe Florida would be getting this kind of treatment if the vote had turned out the other way?”

That sounds very much as though he is accusing the DNC of favoritism. Very wrong thing to do.

He even used the words "superficial fairness" in referring to the DNC's actions about the rules.

From First Read:

Bill Clinton elaborates on FL and MI

For more than six minutes, Clinton went through the timeline of how both states lost their delegates, and who was to blame. While he has made the case before, he placed new emphasis on it today, as it becomes clearer that seating the delegates from both states is one of the few remaining options to help Hillary Clinton defeat Obama.

“Hillary offered a revote in Michigan; we offered a revote in Florida,” Clinton said. “In both cases, the other campaign said, ‘Nope, no re-vote, we will just see what to do when this thing is over.’ Why would we put Michigan at risk and pretend that these people didn't show up and pretend that somehow she is responsible and the voters themselves are responsible and she should be punished for what intermediaries did?”

Clinton said the removal of Florida and Michigan had a “superficial element of fairness” because Obama and John Edwards took their name off the ballot. But, he added, they did that because Hillary Clinton was ahead in the polls and there was a “very organized and funded campaign to get everyone to vote uncommitted.” However, Clinton herself said last fall that the Michigan contest was "not going to count for anything."

First off, let's get something straight. Howard Dean OFFERED the two campaigns a chance to have a revote. He even asked them to do so. He did NOT keep them from having a revote. Other entities stopped it.

From March:

Florida Revote Plan Scuttled, Michigan Plan Stalls

Florida Democrats reversed course Monday and declared dead their plans to hold a do-over presidential primary to settle the dispute over whether their delegation to the national convention in Denver will be seated.

Karen Thurman, Democratic Party chair in Florida, announced the decision in an e-mail message Monday afternoon, saying thousands of people had responded negatively to her proposal for a vote-by-mail primary in early June.

"We spent the weekend reviewing your messages, and while your reasons vary widely, the consensus is clear: Florida doesn't want to vote again," she wrote. "So we won't. A party-run primary or caucus has been ruled out, and it's simply not possible for the state to hold another election, even if the Party were to pay for it."

The DNC cooperated further by calling a meeting of the Rules committee on May 31 to hear appeals on the issue. But it was NOT the DNC or the Obama campaign that stopped the revote in Florida. Here is more information.

Florida House Dems refuse revote

To the extent that both sides hold out hope that Howard Dean will allow some sort of compromise, it just does not seem as if either side knows Howard Dean. He has said that there are only two options: that the delegations take their fight to credentials committee, or that they attempt to vote again, provided that said vote is approved by the DNC's rules and bylaws committee. There are no other alternatives. He did not say: "There are no other alternatives, except for the other other alternative, which is some extra-juridical solution that involves a backroom deal."

Let's set the record straight on who stood up against the revote that Bill Clinton is demanding at this late date.

Nelson and Levin say no revotes in their states.

Sens. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) dismissed the possibility in interviews on Tuesday. Levin and Nelson said caucuses would effectively void the primaries in each of their states, and are pushing to have their delegates receive full voting power at the convention.

They did not want a revote, they wanted the original primary dates to count because by March Obama was moving up in the polls.

Who else did not want the revote?

Hillary co-chair, Debbie Wasserman Schultz fought the revote.

"The potential of a do-over is slim to none," said Wasserman Schultz, a national co-chair of Clinton's campaign. "The cost of a do-over is beyond reach. A do-over would be unfair. We still have nerves that are very raw from the 2000 recount in Florida."

The people on the Clinton campaign need to figure out the real story behind the lack of a revote. It is not productive for Bill Clinton to be pushing this today on the campaign trail.

Nor is it productive for him to imply that the party chairman is not being fair to his wife.